Forum:Rewriting History
How real? Have we decided how we wish to handle how real the people, events, and information from Rewriting History is? Everything in the episode is Suspect since there is no clear moment when Kim and Ron fell asleep, only that they awoke at the end. So *everything*, even finding the museum photo of Mim and Jon, may never have happened. The only other data points we have outside this episode is the "Discovery of the Naco" daydream and Jon's head as a parade float. Suspect information also includes Demenz as Dementor's true surname. (LR headfanon alert: I shall be addressing this in my Bonnie the Vampire Slayer as Kim and Ron victims of a "dream demon" or "nightmare/mayor" which she rescues them from) I ask because Mim and Jon are being re-edited back in as relatives when their very existence was deemed as "Iffy". No slight against you Dap, you had yet to join us when we last chatted about it. Love Robin (talk) 16:03, February 14, 2013 (UTC) :No offense taken. I could go either way on the subject myself. - Dap00 18:06, February 14, 2013 (UTC) ::I think that it is pretty safe to assume that everything between when Kim and Ron yawn to the point where Barkin wakes them up is part of a dream. In other words, everything dealing with Jon, Mim, etc. is circumspect as to being real. ::I have been prefacing all of the articles with something like, "Since Bartholomew Lipsky's appearence in "Rewriting History" was in a dream it is debatable whether he was real or simply part of Kim and Ron's shared dream." ::Now, the real question here is what do we want to do about linking them in other articles, especially the infobox, where no explanation can be given. ::My take is that we do not place them in the infobox, but they can be linked to in the body of the text, as long as some reference to them being part of a dream and thus maybe not real is also presented. ::Thoughts on this anyone else? :Mknopp (talk) 18:55, February 14, 2013 (UTC) :::Having revisited this, I have a few thoughts. First, since the episode starts with Kim wearing one outfit and ends with her and Ron waking and she wearing the *last outfit* from the dream, I have to conclude that the episode started dream-already-in-progress. Granted Real World explanation is probably just a clothing continuity error, but there is no reason why the visual evidence cannot stand as POV evidence. :::Next, for discussion of ALL Modern-Day characters as treated in this episode, I recommend be shifted to "Alternate Versions" instead of weaved in among the rest of the Articles. Also that Kim's Clothing should reflect the outfits in the dream AS IN a dream. :::Love Robin (talk) 18:36, March 16, 2013 (UTC) :I does stand to reason that anything before they are awoken is circumspect. What I am not clear on is your last paragraph. What are you meaning by shifting to "alternate versions"? :Mknopp (talk) 13:00, March 18, 2013 (UTC) :::The section "Alternative Versions". Discussing the actions and events a character experienced from the bulk of ''Rewriting ''could and should be discussed under that header. They are, after all, "Dream-Kim" and "Dream-Ron", etc., and thus 'alternative versions'. :::For the retro-characters who do and could have their own articles, I propose the initial line to be ''"In a dream shared by Kim and Ron, xxxxxx was yyyyyy. It is unclear if they actually existed, and following events actually occured." ''Except for Jon's head parade float establishing at least him as "real", if not necessarily the events of the dream as applied to him. While this presumes that K or R eventually shared the contents of their shared dreaming experience with someone, it allows us to be more definitive in the rest of the POV parts of the article. :::Love Robin (talk) 14:28, March 18, 2013 (UTC)